The best way to solve the world’s environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuel for cars and other vehicles. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Environmental problems become an essential issue facing us in this day and age. Some people believe that raising the cost of gasoline for cars is the best way to tackle this issue. In my opinion, while this solution might be useful, there are other more effective alternatives.
On the one hand, several problems might be solved by increasing the fuel prices. Firstly, people would take public transport rather than driving their private cars. As a result, traffic congestions would be reduced as well as emissions would lessen. Secondly, fossil fuels consumption would be decreased. Therefore, there would be fewer harmful fumes exhausted to the environment. Both these problems could be tackled and this would lower the global warming on our planet. Moreover, this might reduce the risk of respiratory diseases on people’s health.
While this measure is effective in some cases, I believe that several solutions are more beneficial to our environment in the long term rather than increasing the cost of petrol. To begin with, it would be better to promote the use of eco-friendly resources such as solar energy, wind power, hydropower. These types of energy are renewable and unlimited, as well as greenhouse effect would be reduced. Furthermore, the government should take encourage residents to reuse or recycle their household wastes into consideration. They could hold some competitions about recycling between local areas, this can help to increase the competitiveness of individuals and they would recycle more than they can. Therefore, less trash is dumped and environmental problems could be reduced.
In conclusion, the rise in petrol prices is a good method for the environment, however, I believe there are a number of solutions that are more suitable in the long term.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-10 | tsln7607 | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | Giang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-20 | Giang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-15 | Anhhhhhh | 78 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, in my opinion, in some cases, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 7.85571142285 229% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 24.0651302605 100% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1509.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29473684211 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85178339174 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59298245614 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.3030306531 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.7647058824 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7647058824 20.7667163134 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9411764706 7.06120827912 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.133574994643 0.244688304435 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0481251597102 0.084324248473 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0562034104495 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0893193055678 0.151304729494 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0500487827861 0.056905535591 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.0946893788 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 50.2224549098 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 9.78957915832 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.